Verdicts & Settlements (front page), December 12, 1997

In law Practice, attorneys occasionally transmit documents that are incomplete or incorrect. In construction defects cases, where experts are employed to prepare lists of defects with costs of remediation, submission of incorrect or incomplete information may preclude later submission of revised documents. This can cut funding for remediation.

 Identification of defects and their causes is subject to interpretation by inspectors or experts, but the central question is whether the alleged defect results from Inadequate blueprint or specification details, poor workmanship, defective materials, deviation from manufacturers installation recornmendations, or improper maintenance.

 Once the source is identified, the next step is designing a remediation plan to support a cost breakdown for repair.

 The four elements of costing repair are:

 * What's the problem?

* Is it a construction defect?

* What is the best method of remediation?

* How frequently does the defect occur?

 While investigating defects, hidden problems sometimes go undetected.

 When calculating the frequency of a defect's occurrence, it is proper to examine all areas where problems have been reported by non‑professionals to exist. To extrapolate for statistical accuracy, all samples must be randomly selected.

Attorneys rely on experts to compile accurate and complete defects lists, and expert work product overseen by a third party ensures accuracy. Counsel should question experts to verify reports for accuracy so that the data interpretation can withstand critical scrutiny.

 Counsel must also examine the credentials of all construction defects experts for practical field experience as well as academic training.

 An experienced expert is a costly commodity. Should an expert lack the necessary experience, it can be costly.

MORE ARTICLES: